Why follow a religion made up by Martin Luther in 1500 and not Christ himself?

  • Thread starter Thread starter stefany379
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hi,

I am now at my non-denom church where I am flourishing as a christian. I have been studying the bible for 3 years and have grown by leaps and bounds. BTW–so have my children (jury still out on my son:eek: )

I have been learning about catholocism here since April and I have learned so much. However, nothing I have learned has convinced me that the RCC has the fullness of truth. Anyone that knows me here knows that I have asked alot of questions and have been open-minded, but when I compare what I have learned here with my bible, it just doesnt add up.
Have you studied where we got the Bible? Do you know its history? How can you say “it doesn’t add up” when the New Testament was written by the Catholic Church? Do you think there’s a possibility that you don’t know all that you need to know about the Church and the Bible? Could it be that your interpretation is wrong, that what you are being taught by your non-denom is wrong? Yes indeedy.

Maybe we should start a new thread and discuss this.

Peace be with you, Katholikos
 
I dont follow Martin Luther I follow Christ and the living breathing love letter He sent us–the bible
But Jesus didn’t write the Bible.
 
But Jesus didn’t write the Bible.
Sorry your right. God wrote the bible through man. Or should I say he inspired men to write what is written.

Thanks for bringing my attention to that mistake.:o
 
Have you studied where we got the Bible? Do you know its history? How can you say “it doesn’t add up” when the New Testament was written by the Catholic Church? Do you think there’s a possibility that you don’t know all that you need to know about the Church and the Bible? Could it be that your interpretation is wrong, that what you are being taught by your non-denom is wrong? Yes indeedy.

Maybe we should start a new thread and discuss this.

Peace be with you, Katholikos
Hi,
No I absolutely do not know everything about the bible and the CC. Nobody knows it all not even the CC. There is just too much info. in the bible. However yes I do know some history and I do know that the CC did not write the bible. It only put together what we know as the bible today. I am ok with that–no argument there.
My denom follows the bible as does the CC. I see nothing wrong with that. I am not saying the CC is wrong on everything either. Like I have said before(maybe I should make it my signature:D )I just dont think the CC is The One and Only Church in which has the fullness of the truth.
 
What about the man named Guy Doud who was a former Evangelical Protestant who converted to Catholisism last Easter? He was in The Protestant Church for 17 years!! He decided to go to a Catholic Church, seeing how Holy they were, always praying quietly. In his own words he described his church as “cheap grace” and “blue jeans preferred.” He talked about how there is no authority in his church and anyone can leave and start something. These aren’t my words, but his.
 
Stefany
I will never understand why protestants and other shootoffs from Catholisism, want to follow a religion made up by Martin Luther in the 1500’s?
As a Lutheran, I do not follow a religion made up by Martin Luther. I am a Christian. I worship the Triune God. I confess my faith in the words of the three ecumenical creeds (Apostles’, Nicene, and Athanasian). Martin Luther did not change any part of these basic Christian doctrines. To be sure, there are major differences in Lutheran and Catholic theology, but we do share a common belief in the basics.
Everyone knows The King James Bible has many errors, yet they ignore that fact. King Henry was a mad man, beheaded 3 of his wives, yet he started The Church of England.
I’m not about to defend Henry VIII, but I can only blame him for beheading two wives. While I can’t put the right names in order, Henry’s six wives’ fates were: (1)divorced, (2)beheaded, (3)died, (4)divorced, (5)beheaded, (6)survived.

Peace,
Gary
 
What church did the first 33 bishops of Rome/now called popes belong to then way before constitine stepped up to the throne? That kills the constitine theory every single time.
 
The various forms of Protestantism are simply variants of Christianity, of no more intrinsic importance than religious orders or theological schools within Catholicism.
That sounds nice, but it simply cannot be true. What do you base this statement on? While I agree that there are plenty of people in differing denoms, that devout themselves fully to christ in the best way they know how, I hardly see how you can over simplify it with such a label.

When two seperate doctrines are taught on things as fundamental as baptism, the eucharist, salvation, rules of faith, the bible itself and what belongs in it; how can you simply say it has no importance. Jesus taught us to be loving of all people, but nothing about a growing, and even changing version of Christianity.

God is the way of truth.
Truth is eternal.
The question is not “why be Protestant instead of Catholic” but “why give up our specific traditions rather than incorporating them into the broader stream of Christian faith”?
Edwin
I think the real question is; why were those traditions even began in the first place?

What do you mean incorporate them into the broader stream of christianity? What is this stream? I honestly do not understand the point you are going for in that statement. Could you please elaborate.
 
I think it is vital to realize that Martin Luther and the other Reformers did not plan to start ‘new’ churches but believed they would be able to reform the one Church of Christ. Such reformations had happened before; I believe it was the Saints Benedict and Francis who each were instrumental in bringing reforms at times when the Church was very corrupt. During the Arian controversy, there was a point at which only a handful (three or four) bishops remained faithful to the Trinitarian formula; the rest had been drawn over to Arianism. The Reformers drew on these historical precedents as justification for their efforts. Later, of course, the divisions sharpened and positions hardened. But, even today, Protestants do not see themselves as believing in a Church established by Luther, Calvin, Cranmer, or Henry VIII: they see themselves as the flamekeepers of the historic Christian faith which (to Protestant eyes) was adulterated and compromised by the Roman Catholic Church.
 
I don’t think the question at hand is very relevant - people convert to the Catholic Church all the time, most of the great apologists known among Catholic audiences today are converted from Protestantism, but keep in mind that many Catholics are also converting away from the Church because they are not being very well formed in their faith… and those who never have an interest in coverting to the Catholic faith are probably not ignoring the Truth maliciously, but they are more than likely unfamiliar with the Catholic Church or its teachings to even know its the one and True Church - so its a question that has way too many variables to give one definite answer on the question.

Peace
 
Actually, you guys broke off from the Orthodox Church in the eleventh century.

You guys were the first Protestants.
But, somehow, despite being the ones to “split” we took the leadership with us? and the Orthodox then split into several nationally defined groups (Russian, Greek, Ukranian, etc.) with no over-all leader, and many differences in moral and disciplinary teaching (some Orthodox permit divorce/remarriage up to three/four times; some permit birth control)?
 
You might try understanding Protestantism before you attack it. Martin Luther did not make up our religion. Edwin
Martin Luther challenged the “selling of indulgences by the higher ups in the Catholic church” He wanted to return to previously held Catholic traditions.
 
Stefany

As a Lutheran, I do not follow a religion made up by Martin Luther. I am a Christian. I worship the Triune God. I confess my faith in the words of the three ecumenical creeds (Apostles’, Nicene, and Athanasian). Martin Luther did not change any part of these basic Christian doctrines. To be sure, there are major differences in Lutheran and Catholic theology, but we do share a common belief in the basics.

I’m not about to defend Henry VIII, but I can only blame him for beheading two wives. While I can’t put the right names in order, Henry’s six wives’ fates were: (1)divorced, (2)beheaded, (3)died, (4)divorced, (5)beheaded, (6)survived.

Peace,
Gary
I am very sorry, if you saw what was written as very harsh. I know that Lutherans believe in God, just as Catholics do. We both believe in eternal life.
However, Lutheranism invovled the changing of various beliefs before, that exist before it in the Catholic Church.
Lutherans to my knowledge, do not believe in the Real Prescence, which was held by the Early Fathers.
Many Lutherans no longer pray for the intercessions of the saints, something that Luther used to do.

I suggest you read the Council of Nicaea II which teaches the beliefs of the Holy Catholic Church.
newadvent.org/fathers/3819.htm
 
Actually, you guys broke off from the Orthodox Church in the eleventh century.

You guys were the first Protestants.
Oh really? Then why is it that the Catholic Church is the only “Christian denomination” left that recognizes the permanence of the matrimonial bond?
 
Oh really? Then why is it that the Catholic Church is the only “Christian denomination” left that recognizes the permanence of the matrimonial bond?
Again, I’m sorry to tell someone this, but my background regarding marriage doctrine makes the Catholics look soft.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top